Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

suliman

Member Since 19 May 2004
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 06:08 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Player Generated Weapon Designs

21 April 2016 - 08:26 AM

You need player voting. Checking volume or polycount is meaningless as others have stated, to easy to bypass. And a bigger sword shouldnt by default be more epic/have better stats. Thats really bad design.

 

But why implement this at all? Seems you want to monetize like "second life" or something. But you do realize the game will look pretty ugly with no distinct art direction at all? Imaging WOW but all toons run around with player-made 3d-objects attached to them... In second life it works because there is no competition, just flaunting your expensive gear.

 

And you pay less for a more ugly sword/armour? So many players will buy just that (because who likes grinding for in-game money). Not a game I would like to play...

 

I mean it COULD work in a super-popular, super-populated gameworld if you strictly control the creation process with voting etc. I just dont think its realistic at all.


In Topic: Abstracted battles/units (mego-lo-mania style)

19 April 2016 - 01:04 AM

The simpleness stems from that you simply select some units and place them in a sector and all the fighting is automatic. No aiming, no focus-fire. Yes units will (maybe) have different strength values in different terrains, but thats pretty much it. This is VERY similar to the old game mega-lo-mania.

 

I dont plan to have many unit-types such as spearmen better against cavalry and so on. Maybe like so:

-Peasants (weak, produce in any city)

-Footmen (medium, produce in castles)

-Knights (strong, produce in high-level castles, maybe attack bonus as well)

 

Projectile units (like archers and catapults) could look nice in a 2D side-view but im not sure how they would work mechanically since units just swarm around and drain hostiles HP...

 

The idea behind this is to make animation simple enough for me to complete myself as well as keeping battles more about placement of the armies on the gameworld (the sectors). There is a level of "city management" so it might be good the battles are simple...

 

Plz keep brainstorming and commenting, I may need it:)


In Topic: Beyond Warlords 2-type of "quest"

18 April 2016 - 04:50 AM

Why does the no of players have to outnumber the ruins? Typically you have no more than 8 players in a multiplayer strategy game and you can have at least 20 ruins on a moderately sized map.

 

The quests/ruins doesnt have to be a minigame. It depends on how much other stuff player have to do in the game. It can just be a bonus such as finding some gold or item to buff the army. I didnt like that in Warlords 2:

 

You enter a ruin

1. Most often: You kill a monster. Get a bonus which is helpful

2. Sometimes: You just die. Your hero is slain which is a disaster, at least in the beginning.

3. I cannot affect or predict the outcome.

 

Loosing a quest could instead damage the hero (requiring rest to come back to action) and the risk/outcome should be monitorable.


In Topic: What physics mechanism do you apply for double-jumps?

18 April 2016 - 04:35 AM

Option 1 is most common for platformers at least and I find it most satisfying as a player. Option 3 seems really strange to me.


In Topic: Abstracted battles/units (mego-lo-mania style)

18 April 2016 - 01:32 AM

Noone? Is the question to vague?


PARTNERS